According to BitMEX Research, the team contrasted Bitcoin Core with Bitcoin Knots and highlighted a proposed middle-ground client that will not start unless the user manually enters an OP_RETURN relay limit. Source: BitMEX Research on X, Sep 26, 2025. BitMEX Research drew attention to OP_RETURN relay policy configuration as a differentiator between implementations, while providing no parameter values, timelines, or release details in the post. Source: BitMEX Research on X, Sep 26, 2025. Traders tracking BTC network microstructure can note the explicit focus on OP_RETURN relay limits in client policy discussions flagged by BitMEX Research. Source: BitMEX Research on X, Sep 26, 2025.

According to @adam3us, Luke Dashjr and the Knots client plan to implement censorship technology directly, skipping the slippery slope steps he and @csuwildcat had warned about using legal citations from prior internet cases (source: @adam3us). He characterizes the Knots plan as adopting censorship tech immediately and grounds his warning in prior internet legal precedent he referenced (source: @adam3us).

According to @Excellion, Bitcoin Core is trying to prevent private mempools, has removed OP_RETURN limits, and this is driving thousands of users toward Bitcoin Knots while compact block relay breaks, accelerating a shift to private mempools, source: X/@Excellion on Sep 22, 2025. For traders, increased use of private mempools reduces mempool overlap and can impair BIP152 compact block efficiency, potentially increasing relay bandwidth needs and confirmation latency during volatility, source: BIP152 Compact Block Relay (Bitcoin Core specification). BTC traders should monitor on-chain feerate distributions, compact block reconstruction success on nodes, and client share between Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Knots as early indicators of fee pressure and settlement delays, source: Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Knots documentation and network policy references; X/@Excellion.

According to @Andre_Dragosch, a new conversation between @CedYoungelman and @Excellion explains Bitcoin Core v30 versus Bitcoin Knots and includes Samson Mow’s reasons for not running Core v30, source: X post by @Andre_Dragosch dated Sep 22, 2025. The discussion is hosted by @_BitcoinMatrix and is recommended as covering all you wanted to know on Core v30 vs Knots, offering primary-source context for BTC market participants tracking node client developments, source: X post by @Andre_Dragosch referencing @_BitcoinMatrix.

According to @adam3us, some Bitcoin Knots proponents may prefer operating blocks-only nodes to reduce exposure, likening the setup to leech mode in peer-to-peer file sharing, source: Adam Back via X. In blocks-only mode, nodes do not request or relay unconfirmed transactions and synchronize primarily through blocks, which limits local mempool visibility used for fee estimation and confirmation targeting, source: Bitcoin Core -blocksonly documentation. For BTC traders, reduced participation in mempool relay can make widely tracked fee-rate and mempool-size indicators less representative during congestion, affecting predictability of on-chain settlement times, source: Bitcoin Core -blocksonly documentation. Short-term execution strategies that rely on unconfirmed transaction flow should incorporate multiple full-relay data feeds or direct miner interfaces to mitigate blind spots, source: Bitcoin Core -blocksonly documentation.

According to @adam3us, censorship-resistant network dynamics mean a tolerant minority sets effective policy limits, and preferential peering amplifies this, making Bitcoin Knots node policies almost completely ineffective already and both before and after the Bitcoin Core 30 release, indicating minimal change to BTC transaction relay and mempool policy from Knots-driven attempts; Source: Adam Back on X, Sep 15, 2025: https://twitter.com/adam3us/status/1967463326319104053. For BTC traders, this signals sustained censorship resistance and continuity of relay behavior around the Core 30 timeline, reducing near-term network-policy risk relative to Knots-specific settings; Source: Adam Back on X, Sep 15, 2025: https://twitter.com/adam3us/status/1967463326319104053.

According to @Andre_Dragosch, ASmap analysis shows Bitcoin Knots diversified peer adoption at 2.4%, materially below previously reported levels near 20 percent, source: @Andre_Dragosch on X; @callebtc on X. He states the concentration of Knots nodes within a small number of autonomous systems (ASNs) points to sybil manipulation inflating reported node statistics, source: @Andre_Dragosch on X; @callebtc on X. For trading and risk assessment, this 2.4 percent reading is a lower decentralization input for BTC network robustness models than earlier 20 percent figures, based on the ASmap measurements reported, source: @Andre_Dragosch on X; @callebtc on X.

According to @adam3us, he warned that enabling @lukedashjr, whom he describes as a '10th man' immune to peer pressure, will likely backfire on Knots promoters in a surprisingly short timeframe, signaling elevated governance risk headlines for BTC. Source: Adam Back on X, Sep 13, 2025. For traders, this suggests monitoring BTC for headline-driven sentiment swings tied to Knots-related governance disputes and being prepared for rapid shifts in tone that can affect near-term positioning. Source: Adam Back on X, Sep 13, 2025.

According to @Excellion, several Bitcoin node software developers tied to Bitcoin Knots and Bitcoin Core display contempt toward users by labeling other nodes as fake, saying users do not matter, and allegedly DDoSing nodes, which he argues undermines trust and adoption, source: @Excellion. He cites BTCPay and AQUA as examples where respectful stewardship and a user-first approach drove product success, framing developer behavior as central to network health, source: @Excellion. He urges developers to work professionally, avoid attacking users or competitors, and focus on serving the community as stewards to support Bitcoin’s governance, source: @Excellion.

According to @BitMEXResearch, a Bitcoin Knots proponent said Knots lets users actually steer your node like driving a car, and BitMEX Research added that while the comparison is imperfect and the situation differs from 2017, it reminds them of Bitcoin Unlimited advocates’ analogies from that period, drawing attention to a governance narrative around node software choice that traders can monitor for BTC headline sensitivity. Source: BitMEX Research, Twitter, Aug 17, 2025. The post emphasizes analogy and context rather than any protocol change announcement, providing a qualitative signal on client-choice discourse relevant to BTC market monitoring. Source: BitMEX Research, Twitter, Aug 17, 2025.

According to Samson Mow (@Excellion), Bitcoin Core has officially announced that they will remove the OP_RETURN limit in their upcoming release, sparking significant debate among traders and developers. This technical change will allow larger arbitrary data storage on-chain, raising concerns about increased blockchain bloat, higher transaction fees, and potential spam attacks, which could impact Bitcoin's transaction efficiency and trading liquidity (source: Samson Mow, Twitter, May 5, 2025). Traders should closely monitor mempool congestion and fee dynamics as these could influence short-term Bitcoin price volatility. Users who prefer stability are advised to remain on version 29.0 or migrate to alternative implementations like Bitcoin Knots, as highlighted by Mow. This policy shift could also affect altcoins and token projects that rely on Bitcoin for data anchoring, potentially altering cross-chain trading strategies.